Genre: Drama
Director: Ng Say Yong
Cast: Jason Wang, Ivan Lo, Cathryn Lee, Alvin Wong, Tommy Kuan, Zhu Houren, Yvonne Lim. Flapper the Dog
Runtime: 1 hr 32 mins
Rating: TBA
Released By: Clover Films & Golden Village Pictures
Official Website:
Opening Day: 20 September 2012
Synopsis: This is a warm, feel-good fantasy-action drama about a gambler father and his estranged son, and how a dog with predictive powers brings them closer together. Through their ups and downs, the father, Meng, discovers the meaning of altruistic love and loyalty, and the son, Xing, finally finds the father he has always been looking for…
Movie Review:
A movie that boasts of so many ‘first times’, first local movie featuring a dog as the main lead; first leading role for Taiwanese actor Jason Wong; first time directing for local veteran television producer Ng Say Yong; could it possibly score and nab its first at our local ticket box office as well?
My Dog Dou Dou is a movie that centers around a little boy and his encounter with a dog. Following an accident, there seems to be something unusual happening because of the dog. The set-up of the movie started well, introducing the lovable dog and the little boy, and then subsequently the gambling addict of a father, who could not care less for his family. It all still seems very promising at this point, with a bond established between the little boy and the dog which brought some drama and differences to their lives - but eventually it loses steam.
The whole movie was rather slow paced. There were some funny elements here and there, but not enough to keep your interest high. It attempted to put some suspense into the story, but it turned out that the plot was hardly engaging. Moreover, the characterization was pretty weak too. It was hard to ‘feel for them’ or ‘be in their shoes’.
The cast of the movie is supposedly quite promising, with our local young actor Ivan Lo, young Malaysian actress Cathryn Lee, and Taiwanese actor Jason Wong, known for his lead role in the hit Taiwanese drama series, ‘Love’, in the league. But because their roles were nowhere near challenging, and with the lack of support from the plot, there wasn’t anything impressive about their acting. Perhaps the 8 year-old Ivan Lo did outdo himself a little, expressing well his affection towards the dog.
If you were to ask who was really the most outstanding in the movie, it would be undoubtedly the dog, Flapper. The dog is incredibly clever, from the beginning to the end. The ‘tricks’ that it performed were quite impressive, and it is very intuitive and endearing. Flapper is definitely the charm of the movie!
Getting a little bit to the technical side, the camera work definitely needs to be improved. It was rather distracting for the viewers, for instance cutting from one close-up to an extreme close-up many times at one particular scene.
It is definitely refreshing and encouraging to see that our local talents are attempting the road less traveled, like featuring a dog as the main cast. However, there are still many things that need a lot more maturation, like beefing up the story, having more creative angles and giving a better focus overall to be able to match up with other Asian counterparts who produce similar movies
Movie Rating:
(Baffling storyline that boggles you… but not in the most positive sense)
Review by Tho Shu Ling
SYNOPSIS: The Five-Year Engagement stars Jason Segel and Emily Blunt as a couple who just can't make it down the aisle. From career challenges to family pressure and a host of other obstacles, the couple try to plan the perfect wedding but can their relationship survive the continuously prolonged engagement?
MOVIE REVIEW:
I promised myself some day when I retire I will re-watch every one of Judd Apatow productions again to see if it’s really funny. Obviously not every flick he touched is gold (see “Year One” and “Fun With Dick And Jane”) yet the successful writer/director/producer of hits such as “The 40 Year Old Virgin” and “Knocked Up” still have what it takes to make an ordinary rom-com enjoyable. Case in point, “The Five Year Engagement”.
Produced by Apatow, co-written by leading man, Jason Segel and director Nicholas Stoller, the movie takes a solid look at how two lovers spent five heartache years trying to get hitched. Meet Tom (Segel), a successful San Francisco sous-chef who is happily in love with Violet (Emily Blunt), a PhD graduate. The two lovebirds are ready for each other and Violet has agreed to Tom’s proposal. Just when they are about to get married, Violet gets accepted into a post-doctorate program in Michigan and their wedding plans got delayed. The reluctant Tom has to leave his promising career to move to Michigan with Violet. And it’s there at icy cold Michigan, their once loving relationship took a dive and things got worse than expected.
“The Five Year Engagement” is an engaging, sometimes poignant and sometimes raunchy love journey of Tom and Violet. It can be pretty formulaic but it works mainly because of the sizzling chemistry between Segel and Blunt who has appeared together earlier in the Jack Black’s flop “Gulliver’s Travel”. Segel who broke into superstardom in another of Stoller’s comedy, “Forgetting Sarah Marshall” has the charm of an everyday’s man to pull off a character that descends into near madness because of all the uncertainty and waiting for his fiancée to finish her studies. Look out for the crazy antics involving his obsession with hunting and yes he gets to show off some rear nudity instead of his family jewels this time round.
As per any Apatow production, the flick is filled with oddballs ranging from Tom’s buddy Alex (Chris Pratt), Violet’s sister, Suzie (Alison Brie), a stay-at-home daddy and Violet’s postgraduate classmate, a masturbation-obsessed Kevin Hart. Pratt stole the show with his occasional wisecrack and silly performance (Pratt can sing in Spanish and he is surprisingly good) and watch out for Blunt and Brie’s impersonations of Elmo and Cookie Monster that is genuinely funny. Minus the appearances of Apatow’s regulars, Paul Rudd and Jonah Hill, the supporting cast here deserved a special mention alone. Not forgetting newly crowned Spider-Man villain, the underrated Rhys Ifans playing Violet’s professor who harbours alternative motive.
While the story took a long detour to get back to the crux, “The Five Year Engagement” is a testament to Segel’s storytelling skills (he even throws in a shocking frostbite scene to catch your attention). This rom-com has all the ingredients that make it works; it will make you shed tears of sadness and laugh-out-loud at all the absurdness. This Apatow-produced comedy is a recommended flick.
SPECIAL FEATURES:
You can skip the 9 minutes Gag Reel and a pointless Deleted Scene and jump straight to the 5 Extended and Alternate Scenes where you can certainly find some more laughs.
AUDIO/VISUAL:
Audio obviously is not remarkable consider the genre but dialogue remains strong and clean throughout while colours and image detailing are consistently presentable and excellent.
MOVIE RATING:
DVD RATING :
Review by Linus Tee
|
THE FIERCE WIFE FINAL EPISODE kicks off to a "fierce" startPosted on 16 Sep 2012 |
SYNOPSIS: In Men in Black™ 3, Agents J (Will Smith) and K (Tommy Lee Jones) are back... in time. J has seen some inexplicable things in his 15 years with the Men in Black, but nothing, not even aliens, perplexes him as much as his wry, reticent partner. But when K's life and the fate of the planet are put at stake, Agent J will have to travel back in time to put things right. J discovers that there are secrets to the universe that K never told him -- secrets that will reveal themselves as he teams up with the young Agent K (Josh Brolin) to save his partner, the agency, and the future of humankind.
MOVIE REVIEW:
When a movie had an unfinished script when the camera rolled and went through so much rewrites by countless writers during the production process, you probably think it’s a shitty piece of work. Released a decade after the last instalment, “Men In Black 3” turned out to be such an enjoyable piece of sci-fi madness in the end that you instantly forget about the atrocious “Men In Black 2”.
For the record, I hated MIBII. In my opinion, it was more of a cash-on, lazy sequel to the original. Ironically, the long-delay and rewrites actually benefited this one. Agent J (Will Smith) and Agent K (Tommy Lee Jones) are back in their aliens busting business while at the same time, a dangerous criminal, Boris the Animal has escaped from the LunarMax prison on the moon. All of a sudden, the present and reality is altered and J finds K has been killed in action in the year 1969. Armed with a time-jump mechanism, Agent J must travel back in time to enlist the help of a younger Agent K (played by Josh Brolin) to intercept Boris, save the planet and K himself as well.
While MIB3 retains the rich imagining of MIB1, it discards all those flat elements that killed the sequel and inject itself with a fresh sense of direction and most importantly, a poignant story that completely nails it. Shortly after the opening, the first major action set which took place at a Chinese restaurant quickly restores faith in the audience with its energetic trademark quirky humour, ultra-cool weaponry and outrageous creature effects courtesy of makeup guru Rick Baker. Baker continues to impress with his series of gothic monsters and aliens that pay homage to the creatures of the sixties seen on television and movies.
The new movie even throws out regular characters such as the annoying talking Frank the pug and Chief Zed and introduces a pretty funny Emma Thompson as the new head of MIB and of course, Josh Brolin doing a perfect deadpan younger version of Agent K. The Oscar nominee’s performance really outshone Will Smith here but the fresh (older) prince after a long hiatus still has what it take to lighten up the screen albeit a little restrained. And don’t worry, the stick-like bugs are still hanging around and a hilarious Bill Hader (“Paul”) in a cameo as Andy Warhol aka Agent W is always welcome.
As if to make up for the disastrous second outing, director Barry Sonnenfeld and his cast have hit a home run with this third entry with its fast-paced engaging plotting and charismatic performances. Trust me, you don’t really need a neutralizer to wipe out your memories of it.
SPECIAL FEATURES:
Partners in Time: The Making of MIB3 is a featurette that briefly covers the different aspects of the movie including alien makeup effects, visual effects, how the script evolves and interviews with the cast and crew etc.
Gag Reel showcases how much fun the cast are having while shooting the movie. You can also see lots of unfinished VFX in the background.
The Music Video “Back In Time” by Pitbull round up the special features.
AUDIO/VISUAL:
MIB3 boasts a rich, dynamic surround track that guarantees to give your home theater set a good work out. Images are sharp, details are fine, colours are balanced and natural. The audio and visual aspect of this DVD is overall excellent.
MOVIE RATING:
DVD RATING :
Review by Linus Tee
Genre: Romance/Comedy
Director: Lee Toland Krieger
Cast: Rashida Jones, Andy Samberg, Chris Messina, Ari Graynor, Will McCormack, Emma Roberts, Elijah Wood, Eric Christian Olsen
Runtime: 1 hr 32 mins
Rating: NC-16 (Coarse Language and Some Sexual References)
Released By: Cathay-Keris Films
Official Website: http://sonyclassics.com/celesteandjesseforever/
Opening Day: 4 October 2012
Synopsis: Celeste (Rashida Jones) and Jesse (Andy Samberg) met in high school, married young and are growing apart. Now thirty, Celeste is the driven owner of her own media consulting firm, Jesse is once again unemployed and in no particular rush to do anything with his life. Celeste is convinced that divorcing Jesse is the right thing to do -- she is on her way up, he is on his way nowhere, and if they do it now instead of later, they can remain supportive friends. Jesse passively accepts this transition into friendship, even though he is still in love with her. As the reality of their separation sets in, Celeste slowly and painfully realizes she has been cavalier about their relationship, and her decision, which once seemed mature and progressive, now seems impulsive and selfish. But her timing with Jesse is less than fortuitous. While navigating the turbulent changes in their lives and in their hearts, these two learn that in order to truly love someone, you may have to let them go.
Movie Review:
Celeste and Jesse have a problem: they’re rapidly approaching the end of their marriage, but they’re still incredibly infatuated with each other. Promising to remain best friends, they continue to hang out with each other, sharing laughter in the same childish jokes that they probably made when they first met and exchanging furtive glances whenever they speak with fake accents. She’s at the peak of her career, marketing the album of a famous pop star and going on national television to promote her new book. He’s on the less ambitious flip side, barely making money as a freelance artist. So while it’s obvious what makes them connect like so few people do, it’s also clear why they’re getting a divorce.
Celeste and Jesse Forever delivers the split really early and spends the rest of the time exploring its consequences. It then becomes less a curious study of relationship dynamics and more an intimate narrative of what it means to want love that can’t be had anymore. Surely it’s a strange and mutinous decision in a genre far more interested in telling stories of how couples come to happily married ever after and occasionally the emotional journey towards a split. Whilst other movies simply lie idly for the opportunity to offer a take on life after divorce, Celeste and Jesse Forever snatches the issue quickly and boldly. There is still love after divorce, but it’s not the sort we have come to associate with.
At the heart of the movie is Celeste. She’s forced to confront the untimely news that her former husband is going to remarry another woman after Jesse’s one night stand makes him a father. It’s a mighty blow for Celeste: Even if she constantly encourages Jesse to date another girl, Celeste still loves Jesse. Jesse’s determined to move on and start a new life with someone else, but Celeste isn’t quite prepared to deal with the sudden interruption to the modicum of post-split love she has so comfortably attached herself to. She swings herself into aimless dates with other men and spends her time just wallowing in self-pity. Celeste learns a thing or two during the process, but there’s ultimately no conclusion.
If anything, this lack of purpose at the end only means you wouldn’t need to remember every detail and piece the information together to form a larger understanding of the movie. It’s a complicated subject matter that Celeste and Jesse Forever readily breaks down, resulting in a lucid and charming movie that focuses on bits of drama and discovery. The decidedly low key approach may not please everyone, but it’s the way the movie’s intended to be watched. That said, Celeste shares many insightful moments of drama with Riley, the pop star whose album she’s promoting. Each woman has her own set of thorny issues, but it’s the manner in which both eventually come to relate to and support each other that stands out. You suspect that if Celeste had changed her attitude earlier, she’d have better coped with the divorce.
There’re few movies to measure Celeste and Jesse Forever against, which isn’t surprising because it’s one of those movies that reaches for the genre from a new angle. Granted, the epistolary angle isn’t exciting, even boring at times, but it’s yet another sign that mainstream Hollywood is willing to continue discovering in a landscape already saturated with clichés. The low key approach means the movie blazes through the start and middle (dating and marriage), begins at the end (split happens!) and still doesn’t end at the end (Is he really going to remarry!). It takes its time to explore this short period, focusing on brilliant bits of drama and discovery. It’s not a perfect formula, but at least the basic formula is now here for someone else to perfect.
Movie Rating:
(Picking up after the split, the movie proposes a new take on love. It isn’t exciting, but there’re brilliant bits of drama and discovery to be had)
Review by Loh Yong Jian
Genre: Drama/Thriller
Director: Nicholas Jarecki
Cast: Richard Gere, Susan Sarandon, Tim Roth, Brit Marling, Laetitia Casta, Nate Parker, Bruce Altman
RunTime: 1 hr 47 mins
Rating: NC16 (Coarse Language and Drug Scenes)
Released By: Shaw
Official Website: http://www.arbitrage-film.com/
Opening Day: 3 January 2013
Synopsis: Nicholas Jarecki makes an auspicious directorial debut with this taut and alluring suspense thriller about love, loyalty, and high finance. Arbitrage—buying low and selling high—depends on a person’s ability to determine the true value of any given market. It’s a talent that has made billionaire hedge fund magnate Robert Miller the very portrait of success in American business. But on the eve of his sixtieth birthday, Miller finds himself desperately trying to sell his trading empire to a major bank before the extent of his fraud is discovered. When an unexpected bloody error challenges his perception of what things are worth, Miller finds that his business is not the only thing hanging in the balance.
Movie Review:
A good film has a way of seamlessly leading you into its world, and Arbitrage has that perfect introduction that impresses from the get-go.
For the first five minutes of the movie, the audiences get an intimate look of a rose-tinted painting of the upper class American dream. Our star is Robert Miller (played by Richard Gere), a hedge fund magnate who appears to have it all. He lives a luxurious jet-setting life and birthday celebrations look like well-curated scenes straight out of aRalph Lauren spread. Indeed, if films had smells, Arbitrage would have smelled like whisky and cologne, and all those accoutrements of the rich that benefits from the film’s thematic capacity for high-end product placement.
For all it’s worth, Miller is dead-set on being “the richest guy in the cemetery,” and only a rocky trade stands between him and Godhood. Into this picture of perfection, first-time director Nicholas Jarecki subtly inserts the rumblings of impending doom.
Gere, who still has the charms of a suave tycoonhe so elegantly portrayed in Pretty Woman (1990) is a perfect fit for the role of Robert Miller. But for all the hype over his “stellar” performance in this film, Gere doesn’t help Miller develop much beyond the stereotype of the alpha male in his 50s. Winsome Wall Street player airs? Check. Stone-cold ambition burning in his eyesand coursing through his veins? Check. But complex character study? Not a chance.
Instead, the character who really shines is the “nicely indelicate” detective Bryer (played by Tim Roth) who steals the show with his idiosyncratic coolness. An intense first encounter between Bryer and Miller marks the first real win after the opening episode.
Slumping on the couch as Miller sits across him in the hot seat, Bryer is ace as a shrewd, cunning detective, whose superficial nonchalance ingenuously masks the synapses firing away in his suspicious mind when he is two steps ahead of Miller in the interrogation scene. Bryer deftly embodies both good cop and bad cop at the same time, and the scene has all the makings of a fine drama. Unlike Gere, who seems to act straight out from a textbook, Bryer gives the audiences a character something quite unexpected and intriguing.
So when Miller gets caught in an accident which could derail an already-shaky trade, he starts acting like a kid who just broke a vase, and desperately tries to cover his tracks from the scene of the accident. Throw into the mix an already distant father-daughter relationship, which is further threatened when Miller’s precious, well-heeled daughter (played by Brit Marling) and employee starts to discover some nasty secrets to do with their company’s accounts. Marling’s fresh-faced presence is initially welcoming and apt for portraying the whole “well-to-do and of the finest pedigree” aura expected of the offspring-of-a-multi-millionaire. But her absurdly consistent genteel utterances soon become more characterless than fun.
There are important and deeper issues at play in the film, which shows how political and economic interests often get in the way of justice, or how a layman can get hauled to the police department for a rough interrogation, but appointments have to be arranged for the rich.
But who isn’t already privy to the underhand workings of the uber-rich, orheard of the story of a rich man who buys, connives and cheats his way out of murder? The film banks too heavily on this all-too-common theme and as a result, fails to sustain strong interest throughout. A car crash changes everything in a minute. The horror. An expensive love affair with a Bohemian art chick—oui, she’s French, too, and that makes it especially passé. For the involvement of a star-studded cast with the likes of Susan Sarandon, the plot of Arbitrageis astoundingly trite.
Simple story lines do work, but for Arbitrage, all the editing in the world can’t seem to save it from a lackluster script. For a better high stakes drama about the financial world and its inner workings, the recent HBO television drama film Too Big to Fail (2011) about the collapse of Lehman Brothers, fares way betterin keeping audiences on the edge of their seats.
Indeed, agood thriller does not become one on the basis of intense, echoic mood music and a pretty cast alone. While the acting in Arbitrage is decent, there’s something about the film that’s a little flat, and it does, at times, feels less of a thriller and more of the draggy, tiring travails of a troubled rich man.
When you find yourself sliding in and out of the story, think of the word “arbitrage” and how the term plays out as a metaphor in the film. That should get you pass the boring moments, hopefully.
Movie Rating:
(Arbitrage is an "okay" film. It’s not as good as the media and all that Oscar buzz will have you expect)
Review by Tay Huizhen
Genre: Thriller/Horror/Mystery
Director: Michael J. Bassett
Cast: Sean Bean, Adelaide Clemens, Radha Mitchell, Carrie-Anne Moss, Malcolm McDowell, Martin Donovan, Heather Marks
RunTime: 1 hr 35 mins
Rating: NC-16 (Violence and Gore)
Released By: Shaw
Official Website: https://www.facebook.com/SilentHillRevelation
Opening Day: 6 December 2012
Synopsis: Heather Mason and her father have been on the run, always one step ahead of dangerous forces that she doesn't fully understand, Now on the eve of her 18th birthday, plagued by horrific nightmares and the disappearance of her father, Heather discovers she's not who she thinks she is. The revelation leads her deeper into a demonic world that threatens to trap her forever.
Movie Review:
There are numerous reasons why you might not be able to remember the Silent Hill franchise – neither in its original videogame format nor its movie form – in a few years’ time. Once the subject of much critical praise, the horror videogame series has been worn down to a seemingly endless run of aimless spin-offs and imagination is quickly expiring. But the franchise has always been able to retain its fair share of rabid fans and wikis devoted to explaining every nook and cranny of its stories, for some reason, and that has automatically made it one of the most adaptation-worthy game series around. So now we have arrived at the second Silent Hill movie.
You might wonder if it’s for better or for worse, but there’s never much time in Revelation 3D for you to put that thought into serious consideration. Michael J. Bassett, taking over directing duties from Christophe Gans who helmed the 2006 original, rudely pushes viewers into a hellhole of ominously charged imagery even before you’re introduced to any sort of exposition. If you’re not used to this confusing watch-first-and-I-will-explain-later style of filmmaking, then you had better conform yourself to it as quickly as possible or you might experience more difficulties in watching the movie. The narrative is delivered in untidy chunks, succeeding only in exacerbating an already garbled plot and breaking the momentum of the action.
Much of this narrative surrounds a certain Heath Mason, who is constantly moving house and changing identities in order to escape capture by the ‘Order of Valtiel’. Not that she needs any reminder of danger, but daily nightmares and lingering suspicions of her nightmares being real certainly don’t help. She is forced to confront her fears when her father is kidnapped under mysterious circumstances one day. To rescue her father, she needs to venture into Silent Hill, the abandoned town that is forever blanketed in falling ashes and fog, and retrieve the ‘Seal of Metatron’ from a lunatic tucked away in a crumbling asylum.
If all these terms and plot points sound like nonsense to you, or if you don’t know what Silent Hill is or why its former residents deserted it, then you have either discovered Revelation 3D’s biggest problem or found out that the movie isn’t intended for you. It feels less like a proper movie and more like glorified fan fiction, shaped into a CG heavy spectacle by the most obtuse of directions. An explicit understanding of the game’s lore or the 2006 original (which I suspect that everyone except the most enthusiastic of Silent Hill fans would have already forgotten) is required even if you want only half the enjoyment Revelation 3D offers.
Which is to say Revelation 3D isn’t a great movie. To even call it bad would be generous. Michael J. Bassett certainly knows his way around constructing fantastical 3D worlds, and if the swirling ashes that seem to literally envelop the viewers are of any indication, it also means that he’s capable of delivering visual effects with the kind of technical élan that has so far eluded most filmmakers. Yet he drops the ball on what made the original so occasionally fun: tension. Mason might have been unprepared for the situation, but she never feels like she could be in any immediate danger. Instead, we are left to gawk at the parade of monsters going through their paces.
When all is said, the only thing that remains to be decided is whether you need to watch Revelation 3D. Unless you’re really committed to the videogame, it’s pointless to bother watching the movie. The 2006 original offered the novel sight of Silent Hill on the big screen, showered in a compelling story intertwined with the action and a drawn-out, but intense conclusion. Six years on, this half-hearted sequel is now low on novelty and even lower on enjoyment. Revelation 3D is a forgettable mess, lacking in every aspect save the 3D visual effects. Another sequel is not necessary but if Hollywood trends are to be believed, the Silent Hill movie franchise may yet turn into the next Resident Evil.
Movie Rating:
(This garbled sequel to 2006’s Silent Hill is a forgettable mess that will only interest the most fervent of the horror videogame franchise’s fans)
Review by Loh Yong Jian
Genre: Romance/Drama
Director: Yang Ya-Che
Cast: Gwei Lun-Mei, Joseph Chang, Rhydian Vaughan, Bryan Chang, Fang Siyu, Ding Ning
Runtime: 1 hr 45 mins
Rating: M18 (Some Homosexual Content)
Released By: Festive Films & Cathay-Keris Films
Official Website:
Opening Day: 27 September 2012
Synopsis: “Let’s make a pact: when we’re 30, if we’re still single, then we’ll get married!” Mabel, Liam and Aaron were born in the same small town, deep in the far south of Taiwan. In this final, hotbed year, new feelings arise that will alter the childhood bonds between them forever: Aaron loves Mabel, but Mabel only has eyes for Liam, who is really in love with Aaron. While Liam remains impervious to all Mabel's displays of affection, Aaron steps up his pursuit until, eventually, Mabel gives in to his attentions. Move on to the 1980s where the Taiwanese people are locked in a social revolution to have the Martial Law lifted. Mabel, Liam, and Aaron throw themselves into taking part. Later, as students in Taipei, they fight even harder for their ideals such as joining the Wild Lily Movement. In the course of this, long held secrets are revealed. Coming almost full-circle, the old friends who are there for one another through times of emotional hardship and extreme tragedy come to realize the true value of their lifelong friendship.
Movie Review:
In more ways than one, Gf*Bf is similar to last year’s Taiwanese hit You Are the Apple of My Eye. Both movies start their characters in high school melodrama and trace the development of their friendships / relationships over adulthood. The difference? Apple’s dramatic hymn to the age-old ‘You may not always end up with the one you love most’ dilemma remains the better of the two, recounting the ups and downs of love in ways Gf*Bf doesn’t. That’s despite the fact that Gf*Bf is cast in a more serious tone, telling a love story set against the backdrop of a 1985 Taiwan still in political upheaval. The result is a largely novel blend of romance and politics that, unfortunately, doesn’t work as well as it should. Actually, nothing here works.
The set-up is simple: Aaron loves Mabel, but Mabel loves Liam, but Liam loves Aaron. In case you’re losing track of who’s who, Mabel is female and Aaron and Liam are male. That means Mabel can only love Aaron even though Liam’s the one she truly loves, and Liam can only love Aaron in secret because he doesn’t want others to know that he’s a gay. Eager to spend their youth on something other than sitting around to ponder how to make the love triangle work, our overzealous lovers throw themselves into social movements where they join thousands of others in protests against the Martial Law. As early adulthood beckons, they become more active in their roles, partaking in demonstrations that call for democratic reforms. And then Liam finally reveals that he’s gay.
You can be sure that I didn’t deliberately write that previous sentence to throw the paragraph into disarray because that’s exactly how Gf*Bf works: it never gives any reason why any of the stuff that’s happening needs to happen. I’ll admit that I’m willing to take the idea of a romance movie wanting to make a political statement at face value and its resulting message seriously because that sort of thing doesn’t get tossed around the planning board often and I want to believe that there’s a movie out there that can successfully portray a politics-driven love story. Which is why I’m disappointed with how Gf*Bf turns out. From the start, the motivation for being political activists is ill-defined: Sure, the rebellious nature of young adults means they tend to oppose anything, but the movie seems more interested in doling out fanciful poems during protests than explaining why these students want to get involved in politics or what they hope to achieve with their demonstrations.
Likewise, the protests themselves are unrealistically staged. If you’re going to make a movie that’s partly about political protests, the least you could do was depict the risks associated with it. Threats of expulsion (when the characters are high school students) and arrest (when the characters are adults) loom over the protestors the entire time, but even the one time when Liam comes face to face with a cop and is set to be arrested, the movie progresses into a scene where Liam kisses the cop for several minutes. In a society where protests will lead into all manners of rough treatment from the riot police, turning it into a light-hearted and consequence-free activity seems irresponsible. In not trying to do more with what it wants to say with its political parts, the movie becomes something of a cute dressing: refreshing and bold enough to broach the topic, but not nearly as capable enough to close it off.
This brings us to the question of why anyone would ever want to have politics in a love story if it’s not going to break any new ground in the genre. Here is a movie that becomes increasingly suspicious as you analyse it. It’s teeming with all sorts of ideas that don’t necessarily add any value to the love story, including some homosexual dudes and their wedding that the movie snatches out of thin air midway through. On offer too is a half-hearted sub-plot involving Aaron and some other random woman whose name is never alluded to and whose screen time is limited to less than three minutes, and not forgetting yet another weak sub-plot involving Liam and another random dude that appears much later in the movie. It’s as if Gf*Bf is too afraid to explore more of the core love triangle. The positive effect? It’s better this way.
Watching Mabel, Aaron and Liam interact with each other on-screen is such a painfully terrible experience that I’d rather not have it. Again, the movie doesn’t provide any reason why these three friends actually like each other. The couple in You Are the Apple of My Eye fall in love because the girl is willing to dedicate her time to help the guy improve his schoolwork even though his teachers have already given up on him and he’s touched by her actions. Here? They just like each other. Even if there might be some reason that leads our three friends here to like each other, the movie doesn’t show. Mabel, Aaron and Liam stare at each other for long periods and when they do speak to each other, their conversation is functional above all else. There’s no reminiscing of past experiences, no small talk, no banter: the chemistry is so atrociously awful they might as well be a bunch of robots programmed to stick together.
That’s the largest problem with Gf*Bf. Everything feels half-baked and pretend, and nothing feels satisfying or fulfilling. Every idea here is an elaborate cover-up for the ridiculously bad chemistry between our main characters. Granted, there’re many ideas to contend with: politics, homosexuality and affairs, but since you’re going to watch Gf*Bf for the love story (the title is already an advertisement for the love story), the poorly-concocted love triangle is inexcusable. If you’re looking for a Taiwanese love movie, you’ll be better served with a You Are the Apple of My Eye DVD.
Movie Rating:
(Many half-baked and pretend ideas surround this unfulfilling love story. It’s the atrociously awful chemistry between the main characters that kills the movie, though)
Review by Loh Yong Jian
Genre: Romance/Drama
Director: Heiward Mak Hei-yan
Cast: Joey Yung, Hu Ge, Chapman To, Fiona Sit, Lin Xintong, Wilfred Lau, Carlos Chan
Runtime: 1 hr 42 mins
Rating: TBA
Released By: Clover Films & Golden Village Pictures
Official Website:
Opening Day: 27 September 2012
Synopsis: When an accident temporarily robs her of her voice, Diva J flees to a small deserted village to heal both her mental and physical wounds. Her life changes when she meets and falls in love with the blind Hu Ming, who inspires her to make a comeback. But, in her absence, a new diva has risen. R has become an overnight sensation that everyone sees as the main contender for Js crown. Yet, their successes have come at a high price. J is secretly pining for a forbidden love that seems destined to wither, and R has found that the road to stardom is littered with estranged friends and painful break-ups. But in the midst of this, both divas rise to find their own voice.
Movie Review:
At first sight, the synopsis of ‘Diva’ may make it seem as if the movie were as vacuous as its subject matter – but don’t let that fool you though, because there is really much more to enjoy and ruminate even in writer/ director Heiward Mak’s latest. Essentially a cautionary tale on the perils of stardom, Mak’s ‘Diva’ is surprisingly well-observed and insightful, made all the perceptive by a nice reel-real life twist that sees Joey Yung playing a celebrity modelled after herself.
Yes, the titular character is a singer simply named ‘J’, whose following is large enough for her to stage sold-out concerts at the Hong Kong Coloseum. Despite being on the pinnacle of stardom however, J is disillusioned by the demands of her career – not just her punishing schedule of rehearsals, filming and social engagements, but also the endless wheedling, backbiting and conniving concomitant with the job. That is, even if the latter is largely done by her slimy manager Manson (Chapman To), who has groomed her from the bottom up for the past ten years.
An opening act where Manson spreads a rumour just so a notable designer’s (William So) latest dress can debut at her latest concert series at the expense of another (Fiona Sit) proves to be J’s last straw – and after suffering a breakdown at one of her concerts, she retreats into obscurity while developing a relationship with a blind masseuse Hu Ming (Hu Ge) in a faraway village in China. Indeed, we share your incredulity, but you’ll do better if you look past it as a mere narrative device to illustrate the considerations and compromises that J has to make in order to maintain her celebrity image – ‘what will your fans think if they see that you have to date a blind man?’ asks Manson.
In the meantime, Mak creates a complement for J in the form of rising starlet Red (Mag Lam), plucked from obscurity by Manson to be his next project while J takes an indefinite hiatus. A simple girl with a sweet voice and a naïve ambition to be a famous singer, Red learns the hard way the sacrifices she has to make on the road to success, particularly as her ongoing relationship with her boyfriend Rocky (Carlos Chan) quickly turns sour under the media glare and her work commitments. No matter which rung of the celebrity ladder you are, Mak’s message is that there is always a darker and murkier side beneath the glitz and glamour.
Few films in our memory have attempted to shed light on what goes on behind the scenes of Hong Kong’s entertainment industry, so Mak deserves kudos for tackling what would most certainly be a touchy subject. Certainly, she sidesteps some of the thornier issues, casting Manson as the sole puppet master pulling the strings behind J and Red’s careers – though one would suspect in real life that it is the big bosses at the music labels who are the ones really calling the shots and perhaps getting the favours in return for a fast track to stardom.
Here, Mak only goes as far as to demonise Manson, as well as a film director (Gallants’ director Clement Cheng in a cameo) who forces another wannabe singer Gennie (Venus Wong) to perform sexual favours on him. Mak’s reservation to pull the envelope is understandable – backing this film is none other than Emperor, which for the uninitiated, is the label behind Joey Yung’s music – but within the creative liberties she is able to exercise, Mak still manages to craft an intriguing behind the scenes look at the workings of the industry.
Admittedly, Mak does punch above her weight at times, and the fresh director with just two films under her belt (‘High Noon’ her debut and ‘Ex’ starring Gillian Chung her sophomore) lacks the experience to fully exploit the dramatic potential of such a story. Still, for what Mak lacks in flair, Chapman To makes up for it with verve in one of his best performances. Increasingly augmenting his slate as a dramatic actor, To (who also produced the film) is fascinating as the shady manager willing to do what it takes for his starlets – even if it means spreading anonymous tips to the press just so J and Mag get maximum coverage in the press.
Apart from To, both Yung and Lam essentially mirror their real life careers into the movie – and it is probably no secret that ‘Diva’ is conceptualised as a star vehicle for the former. Both are equally unremarkable – though the fault lies as much in these singers first and actors second as it does with Mak, who for some reason unbeknownst to us does not play to their strengths through showcasing their moves and voices in a live concert arena. Yes, the first time we hear one of Yung’s songs is right at the end of the film, and while it may have been a stylistic choice, it would be easier to buy into the star she is supposed to be if we can identify with her in the shoes of a fan.
Despite its flaws, ‘Diva’ remains an interesting look at the life of a celebrity from the point of view of an ordinary human being transforming to become one as well as that of one trying to live out the life of just another human being. It may not be as revelatory as you’d expect it to be, but there is purpose to the telling of a story rooted in the realities of what we would normally not be privy to. With ‘Diva’ too, Mak has once again proven to be one of the exciting new faces of the Hong Kong film industry – and we’re sure this ‘Diva’ will be one to watch out for in the years to come.
Movie Rating:
(Not without its flaws, this portrait of the perils of stardom is still a fascinating watch thanks to writer/director Heiward Mak’s keen observations and Chapman To’s lively performance)
Review by Gabriel Chong
Genre: Martial-Arts
Director: Stephen Fung
Cast: Jayden Yuan Xiao-Chao, Tony Leung Ka Fai, Eddie Peng, Angelababy, Feng Shaofeng, Shu Qi, Nikkie Shie, Stanley Fung, Xiong Xin Xin, Leung Siu Lung, Fung Hak On, Stephen Fung
Runtime: 1 hr 38 mins
Rating: PG13 (Some Violence)
Released By: Golden Village Pictures
Official Website:
Opening Day: 4 October 2012
Synopsis: As an uncommonly gifted child, Yang Luchan had a fleshy abnormality that holds tremendous power growing on his forehead. However being teased as the town fool, Yang’s mother spurs him to practice martial arts, and following her wishes, Yang travels the distance to come to Chen Village to learn TAI CHI. At this legendary village, everyone practices TAI CHI and uses TAI CHI in every aspect of their lives. Nevertheless, it is forbidden for a villager to disclose TAICHI to an outsider, and Yang learned this the hard way. Upon arriving at the village, locals discourage Yang by challenging him with fights. From the strong men to hold ladies to children, everyone defeats Yang with their TAICHI moves. After facing the toughest battle and being defeated by Master Chen’s beautiful daughter Yuniang, Yang is determined to master the art of TAICHI and he needs to find Master Chen. Little does Yang know, the poor strange man who he befriended with is in fact Master Chen who then saved him from the duel with Yuniang. Master Chen realizes Yang’s genius and disguises himself to secretly guide Yang to his self realization of TAICHI. One day, a frightening steam-powered machine came to the village, lead by Fang Zijing, a childhood friend of Yuniang. He has bribed government officials to permit him to build a railway that will run straight through the village. Yang decided to join forces with Yuniang to defeat Fang Zijing and destroy the machine. This brave act may just win the hearts of the villagers…
Movie Review:
A lot goes on in ‘Tai Chi Zero’ - the first in a planned trilogy that attempts a revisionist take on the classic martial arts movie – but too little of it registers in a memorable way by the time it is over. Inspired by the life of Yang Luchuan – founder of the Yang school of taichi – this kinetic frenzy of a movie sees director Stephen Fung drawing from broad pop culture and cinematic influences to create something fresh, fun and irreverent, though the end result is probably noteworthy only for its ambition.
Barely five minutes into the movie, you get the distinct sense that Fung is trying too hard. Opening with what is supposed to be an epic battle between the Imperial Forces and a band of resistance fighters, we are quickly acquainted with Yang’s supposedly superhuman powers that are unleashed whenever someone hits him on a small horn-like bump on the side of his head (and by the way, it is director Fung himself you see who first pushes that button). Not content to leave it at that, there is an unnecessary flashback that transports us to the day of Yang’s birth just to unravel his tragic childhood.
If what was supposed to be poignant turns up less so, it is squarely Fung’s fault, employing the silent film treatment complete with a playful score and old-fashioned inter-titles to convey the characters’ dialogue over the course of that flashback. That is when you also realise that Fung is serious about greeting all the famous celebs he’s managed to get to cameo in his movie, using captions to tell you who and where an actor playing a particular character comes from – including Hong Kong director Andrew Lau of ‘Infernal Affairs’ as Yang’s father and Shu Qi as his mother (and trust us when we see that his supposed reverence does get ingratiating after some time).
When we return to present time, Yang has blacked out and is advised by a physician (look, there’s legendary kungfu actor Leung Siu Hung!) to seek a new form of inner martial arts, as the brute methods he’s been learning so far will only drain his physical strength and lead to quick and certain death. So Yang escapes in search of the legendary Chen village, renowned supposedly for its tai chi techniques – though he will have to spend the rest of the first half of the movie convincing the villagers to teach their fiercely guarded moves to an outsider.
There’s never any doubt Yang will eventually earn the respect of the villagers, so the first half instead takes a light-hearted tone as Yang faces off against the various village pugilists (one of them played by kungfu veteran Xiong Xin Xin) a la video game style. Amidst the stylised visuals that resemble Edgar Wright’s ‘Scott Pilgrim Vs. The World’ in its pop-art, the film tries to earn some dramatic credit through Yang’s unusual tutelage from a solitary labourer (Tony Leung Kar-Fai), as well as the unwelcome arrival of the East India Company on the heels of former village boy Zijing’s (Eddie Peng) return.
The former follows the narrative convention of a wise old master teaching a brash young kid, while the latter adopts that of a humble village standing up for itself against the forces of modernisation (think ‘Chadni Chowk to China’). Except for the fact that the latter involves a massive steam-run metal machine called ‘Troy No 1’ that seems ripped from the celluloid of Barry Sonnenfeld’s ‘Wild Wild West’, both stories stick faithfully close to formula, and the emotional beats they are meant to hit seem all too perfunctory to resonate.
Ditto for a subplot that fails miserably at building some sort of love triangle between Zijing, the village beauty Yuniang (Angelababy) and an ‘ang-mo’ officer Claire (played by some Hong Kong Caucasian model whose name is among the many we cannot remember) – the dialogue between the apparently starstruck Claire and Zijing is so stilted it is guaranteed to make you cringe. Even with a surfeit of visual distractions, it is clear that the plot – which is really a mishmash of different genre types – is one of the movie’s weak points.
So too in fact are the stylistic choices that Fung settles for. It’s one thing to try to be different and another when you actually succeed – ‘Tai Chi 0’ unfortunately only manages the former. Indeed, all the elements for a good-ol throwback to the classic martial arts movie are in place – a true to life character, an ensemble of notable kungfu actors, and the evil Western revolution (think ‘Once Upon A Time in China’ – but Fung overdoes the cheekiness in messing with the form, and all that animation, comic book graphics and onscreen captioning just grows tired and tiresome too quickly.
Still, if Fung doesn’t have Stephen Chow’s wacky sense of humour to make this the next ‘Kung Fu Hustle’, his love for the martial arts actors of the past is never in doubt. He also does his bit for the kungfu genre by unearthing a new bunch of young actors – including casting a suitably charismatic Yuan Xiaochan in the lead role of Yang Luchuan. With Sammo Hung as action director, you can be sure that the numerous action sequences in the movie do not disappoint – and the ones between Yuan and other true-blue martial arts actors like Xiong Xin Xin are especially thrilling.
Thankfully, most of them do make it alive for the second-parter, which is slated to open just three weeks later. The ending is tantalising to say the least - what with two formidable swordsmen arriving at the gates of the Chen village to challenge Xiong Xin Xin and an army of Western battleships heading towards the Chinese coast loaded with big cannons promising bigger and noisier battles – demonstrating a lot of promise here for a new ‘Wong Fei Hung’-type franchise. While we’re not objecting to Fung’s choice for a playful and inventive take on the kungfu genre, he would do well to pay heed to the oft-told martial arts adage – restraint, and not excess, is what ultimately makes one potent.
Movie Rating:
(A reimagination of the rise of taichi that tries too hard to be playful and inventive at the same time, this mishmash of kungfu, comic book and steampunk ends up messy, unfocused and only borderline entertaining)
Review by Gabriel Chong
| « Prev | 99 | 100 | 101 | 102 | 103 | 104 | 105 | 106 | 107 | 108 | 109 | Next » |
Most Viewed
No content.